Attending Church Inquiry

[JohnnyFlotsam]

In the case of one petitioner, his concept of Deity was based on a belief that trees were his 'God'...

As opposed to an invisible man who lives in the sky, among whose rare earthly manifestations is that of a burning bush, and who expects his followers to regularly engage in some pretty bizarre rituals involving blood and human flesh?

You should probably read this - http://enlightenedawareness.wetpaint.com/page/The+Druids
taking special care to note the name of it's author, before you pass judgment on people whose religious beliefs are significantly different from your own.

That you appear to consider such beliefs as somehow less than acceptable, because of their nature, is exactly the reason such questions should not be asked, Brother. Yes, it's entirely possible that the candidate is simply "a madman or a fool", hearing voices coming from a stand of cottonwoods, but that's a matter rather apart from earnestly held religious beliefs, no matter how different they may be from our own.

 

[wwinger]

You should probably read this - http://enlightenedawareness.wetpaint...age/The+Druids taking special care to note the name of it's author,

I have looked at your recommended reading and find it to be "enlightening" to say the least. I must admit, however, that the author's name was not one with which I was previously familiar. I sought additional information on him and learned that his written contributions to Masonry are considerable, although not viewed as authoritative by everyone. (Brent Morris & Art de Hoya, also 33rd degree SR, have raised questions.)

For over 40 years now I have believed that Masonry required a mono-theistic belief of its initiates. Today I attempted to find support for that belief in the laws of the Grand Lodge of Texas, but could not. Perhaps I have unfairly judged those who believe in more than one God, (ie: trees as Gods). I hope not.

I was not a member of the investigating committee in either of the examples offered. One moved out of state before an investigation was done. The other was investigated, balloted upon and elected to the three degrees. I have spent a considerable amount of time with him since then and I think we have a reasonable understanding of each other's spiritual beliefs. In spite of the rather significant difference in those beliefs, we do respect each other's right to have his own beliefs and we have become good friends in spite of our differences.

My spiritual beliefs have always differed from those of the petitioners I have known, sometimes quite markedly. Yet, those differences, in over forty years as a Mason, have rarely led to any action on my part to exclude someone from Masonry.

Still, the EA charge says, "If in the circle of your acquintance, you find someone desirous of being initiated into Masonry, be particularly attentive not to recommend him unless you are CONVINCED he will conform to the laws, customs and usages of the order; to the end that the honor, glory and reputation of the institution will be firmly established and the world at large convinced of its good effects." I can be "CONVINCED", but it usually takes more than a simple "yes" on the petition for that to take place.

I have found your posts to be generally insightful and reflective of a deep passion for Masonry. Most of the time, I agree with your views. This time, however, we have obvious differences. Your arguments are not going to change my view and I don't expect mine to change yours. It won't be the first time I've disagreed with a Brother and I am sure it won't be the last.

 

[Beathard]

Its pretty easy to put the investigation question into a context, just ask "Upon what book would you like to take the obligation?" If he doesn't understand the question, continue with "The Torah? Veda? Bible? or some other book? We want to make sure that you have your book of faith present." If it is a strange belief system, it will probably come up at this point.

 

[JohnnyFlotsam]

Its pretty easy to put the investigation question into a context, just ask "Upon what book would you like to take the obligation?" If he doesn't understand the question, continue with "The Torah? Veda? Bible? or some other book? We want to make sure that you have your book of faith present." If it is a strange belief system, it will probably come up at this point.

This presupposes that the candidate's religion has a volume of sacred law in printed-and-bound form. Not all do.

 

[Beathard]

The 9 major monotheistic religions all have a sacred text. If the candidate does not believe in on of the 9, I would question his belief in deity as defined by masonry.

The 12 classical religions are:
Baha'i, Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism, and Zoroastrianism.

Three of these are polytheistic: Shinto, Hinduism, and Buddhism.

My understanding of the masonic requirement is a belief in a monotheistic deity. If the candidate is not on of the 9 major classical religions that has a sacred text I would want the investigation committee to ask a few more questions.

How would an obligation be binding if not sworn on a sacred text?

 

[Zack]

This thread started with the subject of "attending church" and has wandered afield.

I still maintain that whether or not I attend church or how often I attend is none of Freemasonry's business.

 

[SWATFrog]

This thread started with the subject of "attending church" and has wandered afield.

I still maintain that whether or not I attend church or how often I attend is none of Freemasonry's business.

I have to agree. There are periods in my life for either business or personal reasons I was not able to attend church the way my parents brought me up to.

But that doesn't mean I lost my faith. I found other ways in my day I could pray and praise God

 

[Beathard]

This presupposes that the candidate's religion has a volume of sacred law in printed-and-bound form. Not all do.

Grand Lodge of Texas Art. 397. (434). Religious Belief: A firm belief in the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and the divine authenticity of the Holy Scriptures is indispensably necessary before a candidate Can be initiated, but this Grand Lodge does not presume to prescribe any canonical books or what part thereof are inspired. It is the policy of this Grand Lodge to permit a candidate whose religious persuasion is based upon other than the Holy Bible to be obligated up on the book of his chosen faith, and same maybe situated upon the Altar in front of the Holy Bible during the conferral of the 3° of Masonry. In which event, all esoteric references to "The Holy Bible" during the conferral of the degrees and the lessons appropriate thereto should be substituted with "The Book of your (my) Faith."

It is pretty clear. Candidate has to have a belief in deity and a sacred book. I cannot locate Church attendance in the law book at all.

 

[Benton]

The 9 major monotheistic religions all have a sacred text. If the candidate does not believe in on of the 9, I would question his belief in deity as defined by masonry.

The 12 classical religions are:
Baha'i, Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism, and Zoroastrianism.

Three of these are polytheistic: Shinto, Hinduism, and Buddhism.

My understanding of the masonic requirement is a belief in a monotheistic deity. If the candidate is not on of the 9 major classical religions that has a sacred text I would want the investigation committee to ask a few more questions.

How would an obligation be binding if not sworn on a sacred text?

What about deists? They don't have a sacred text as such, but they definitely believe in deity.

And as to Hinduism being polytheistic, thats definitely up for debate. In my experience with practicing Hindus, it depends on the individual. A number of them consider the different Hindu 'gods' as subsets of the one true godhead, Brahman, sort of like Christians believe the trinity are all the same God. So, depending on what sect of Hinduism you are speaking of, they're just as polytheistic as Christianity.

I can't speak on Shinto or Buddhism, as I certainly have a lesser knowledge of those two.

 

[Beathard]

OK, I understand your arguement Brother Benton. But Art. 397 says that there has to be a sacred book on which the obligation is taken. If there is no sacred book recognized by the candidate, what do we do? and is the obligation binding if they do not believe in that book?

Many of our forefathers were deists, but there are many types of deism. One is Christian Deism, in which the Bible is used.

 

[Benton]

Ha, I'm not sure that I have an answer, particularly in regards to Grand Lodge Law, I was just being the devil's advocate.

 

[JohnnyFlotsam]

How would an obligation be binding if not sworn on a sacred text?

Here we go again...

Please cite the Masonic law that allows only some so-called "12 classical religions".

Please explain how you claim the requisite authority, and moreover, the insight to judge another man's earnestly professed beliefs after he has stated an answer in the affirmative to "the question".

Any trial lawyer will tell you that oath swearing on Bibles is absolutely no guarantee that the swearer will henceforth speak a word of truth. There is no magic in a book, however much it may be revered by a majority of those present. What counts is the candidate's desire to keep the promises he makes. Asking the candidate to make those promises on an object that is, to him, of significant spiritual import is something we do for his benefit, so that he may, in front "God and everybody", convey his sincerity in as solemn a manner as possible.

The man who made me a Mason was a Native American. At his I,P, and R he took his obligation upon an eagle feather. His people have no printed VSL. Their sacred law is passed down mouth-to-ear. Who are we to suggest that such a man is unfit to be made a Mason because his religion is not on your list, or because he simply wished to be obligated upon something that clearly had, for him, the same religious significance that you seem to attach only to books?

 

[Beathard]

Never claimed to be an authority on law or religon. Never claimed that the 12 classical religons are the only ones. Most religons other than the classic 12, are derived from one of them.

I just cited the law book as it pertains to a sacred text. I can read, but never claimed to invent the english language either. It does state that a sacred text is required.

I am a card carrying native american. My tribe has not sworn on eagle feathers in a very, very long time, if ever. We actually traded items in a guarantee and reminder for committments. In fact the bible has been translated into our native language, Choctaw. And a methodist congregation is on our reservation. Most of us, Choctaws, that are masons take the obligation on the sacred text we believe in: The Bible.

What was said on this thread is: we have a duty as masons to attend church. This is not in the law book. The only requirements regarding religon are a belief in an unnamed deity and an obligation on a sacred book. I am not attempting to argue a point that is clearly written in the law. It does not take a lawyer to read it, but I am sure we can find one if required...

BTW, I did not write the law... Therefore it is not the importance "I" place on the books... It is grand lodge.

 

[JohnnyFlotsam]

BTW, I did not write the law... Therefore it is not the importance "I" place on the books... It is grand lodge.

It would probably surprise you, then, to learn that that particular passage, referring to "the divine authenticity of the holy scriptures" has not always been a part of the GL of Texas laws, and that it is somewhat of an "oddball" requirement, not being a part of most jurisdictions' ritual requirements.

Setting aside the probably pointless observation that the world does not revolve around Texas, is it your assertion then, that "Volume of Sacred Law" must be interpreted in a completely literal (no pun intended) manner? Is it not possible, even preferable, that we interpret that term as referring symbolically to that collection of religious precepts that a man has chosen to live by, regardless of the form of that collection? If not, why not? Especially when so much of our teaching is exactly that; symbol and allegory.

 

[Beathard]

Sure I believe that the Volume of Sacred Law could be symbolic, but the Grand Lodge doesn't. The law states "situated upon the Altar in front of the Holy Bible during the conferral of the 3° of Masonry." It is hard to put the symbolic text on the Altar. I think it needs to be a little more concrete than that.

 

[JohnnyFlotsam]

Now you are being disingenuous. The requirement that "the Holy Bible" (which, accurately or not, is usually taken to mean a KJV Bible in most predominantly Christian jurisdictions) be open at all times upon the altar is something quite apart from that VSL upon which a candidate takes his obligation. Indeed, (and if I am not mistaken) there is wording that makes this abundantly clear. So, if we make exceptions for the candidate who follows Islam or Judaism, why not that of other religions? Why are you so uncomfortable with the idea that a candidate whose religion is not like yours (one with a book) could be made a Mason? When you can answer that one, we can take on the non-trivial issue of all the different, and often conflicting, versions of "the Holy Bible".

There are a lot of religions in the world, Brother. I know of no Masonic precept that defines those which are "acceptable". Attempting to limit that list by some tortured contrivance as "it's got to have a book", is rather missing the point we're supposed to be learning.

 

[Beathard]

I agree totally with you. But the arguement, which I am starting to feel is a personal attack, is missing the point. It is a violation of masonic law to not have a book for the obligation. We as Texas Masons have to have one by masonic law. So, why don't you propose a resolution to change the law to be more masonic. The deadline is May 15th for this year.

 

[Heirophant]

For the record, due to much private inquiry, I'd like to take this opportunity to say I am a firm believer in our Lord And Saviour Jesus Christ. My original military dog-tags identify me as a "NON-DENOM CHRISTIAN" and I prefer the King James Bible over many others although I've grown quite a liking to The New American Bible. I'd also like to state for the record that although I've personally had negative experiences in church as a kid, I've seen what a positive impact regular church attendance can make for many people from all walks of life. Since my original post regarding 'church attendance', (whilst in search of genuine fellowship) I ended up officially joining a very friendly Methodist Community in Texarkana Texas named Williams Memorial Methodist. Although I no longer live in Texarkana Texas, I do my best to keep in contact with members of Williams Memorial as well as many of my brethren at my masonic lodge. Thanks for all the input. It's good to know I can go online to a secure website for Masons and get an honest opinion on just about anything thanks again ya'll.

 

[Cigarzan]

I like going to church but I gotta say, given the choice, I prefer sitting under an old oak tree with my Bible!

 

[cutter2001]

I may be wrong, but I was taught that two things not to discuss at Lodge, or in fellowship with other masons. Was their personal religion, or their politics. Those two things being the quickest way to bring forth divisions and strife within the brotherhood. I have followed that wisdom in my business life as well, and have found it has served me well.